What Tolstoy says about Kutuzov and Napoleon. Essay on the topic “Images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in the novel “War and Peace”

Roman L.N. Tolstoy's War and Peace tells in detail about the military campaigns of 1805, 1809 and the War of 1812. Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy had his own view of the world order, and he also had his own theory about the role of man in history and his significance in the context of eternity. In this article we will analyze the image of Kutuzov and Napoleon in L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”, and below we will present a table of comparative characteristics of Kutuzov and Napoleon.

The place of heroes in the novel

At first it seems that Napoleon has a much larger place in the novel than Kutuzov. His image is already revealed from the first lines. The majority argue that “...Bonaparte is invincible and that all of Europe can do nothing against him...”. Kutuzov is almost absent from entire parts of the work. He is mocked, reviled and often forgotten. In the novel, Vasily Kuragin mocked Kutuzov more than once, but they rely on him, although they do not say it out loud.

Comparative characteristics of Kutuzov and Napoleon

Comparison of Kutuzov and Napoleon

Kutuzov and Napoleon are two wise commanders in the novel who played a huge role in history. Each had a different goal and each used different approaches to defeat the enemy. L.N. Tolstoy gives us some idea of ​​the appearance, character of the heroes, as well as their thoughts. This view helps us put together a complete image of Kutuzov and Napoleon, as well as understand which priorities are more important for us.

• Also see -

The lesson is offered to teachers of general education schools and teachers of general education subjects of non-governmental and secondary vocational education. The novel "War and Peace" is the greatest work; not only the content is interesting, but also perhaps the unique thoughts of the author. Particularly interesting are historical figures, their role in history, and Tolstoy’s attitude towards them. During the lesson, children learn to analyze, compare, and express their own opinions.

Download:

Preview:

Literature lesson on the topic: “Kutuzov and Napoleon in L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace.”

"There is no greatness where there is no simplicity,

Goodness and truth."

L. N. Tolstoy.

1. LESSON OBJECTIVES:

TRAINING.

1. Help students understand the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon from a historical, moral, universal and spiritual point of view.

2. Using the method of comparative analysis, identify Tolstoy’s attitude towards Kutuzov and Napoleon, based on the author’s views on history.

3. Teach to compare the characters of the heroes, to see the motives of their actions;

Developmental.

4. Help to critically understand the role of personality in history.

5. Create conditions for independent work.

6. Develop the ability to work in groups.

7. Develop communication skills.

Educating.

8. Education of patriotism and humanism.

Problem: what is the role of personality in history according to L. N. Tolstoy in the novel “War and Peace”?

Technologies: design, critical thinking, gaming technology, problem-based learning, person-centered learning.

Methods: verbal, visual, practical, research.

Training methods: individual, paired, group

Type of lesson: combined.

During the classes.

1. Teacher's word. (20 sec.)

- Good morning, dear guys and distinguished guests! Today we came to class in a good mood! And we will earn the maximum number of good marks. This is what a teacher’s internal monologue might look like when he asked the students a question: “They got quiet. They are silent. Do they think? Do they know or not? Are you hesitant to say? I believe they know. I am waiting".

Teacher: The illustrations present to your attention portraits of heroes of the War of 1812. Are we studying a novel?

Students: We study parts and chapters of the novel “War and Peace” that are associated with a great era - the Patriotic War of 1812.

1. Let's check your homeworkHow we did it in 5 minutes. (Should have read all the episodes about Kutuzov and Napoleon).

Work in 5 groups of 5-6 people. Experts mark the answers on the sheets.

Group 1 writes down the number of tasks with an answer about Napoleon. (2, 4).

Group 2 - Kutuzov (6, 9).

Group 3 - Kutuzov (14, 15).

Group 4 – Kutuzov (1, 3, 5).

Group 5 – Napoleon (7, 8, 10).

1. “In an unbuttoned uniform, from which, as if freed, his fat neck floated out onto the collar, he sat in a Voltaire chair.” (Kutuzov)
2. “He was wearing a blue uniform, open over a white vest that hung down over his round belly, white leggings that hugged the fat thighs of his short legs, and boots.” (Napoleon).
3. “An intelligent, kind and at the same time subtly mocking expression shone on his plump face” (Kutuzov).
4. “There was an unpleasantly feigned smile on his face.” (Napoleon).
5. “He was weak to tears,” like a mere mortal, “the expression of fatigue in his face and figure was still the same” (Kutuzov).
6. He "reluctantly played the role of chairman and leader of the military council." He is kind towards his soldiers; for him they are “wonderful, incomparable people.” (Kutuzov).

7. “The trembling of my left calf is a great sign,” he said later.” (Napoleon).

8. “He was in that state of irritation in which you need to talk, talk and talk only in order to prove to yourself that you are right.” “In his mind, everything he did was good... because he did it.” (Napoleon).

9. “He understands that there is something stronger and more significant than his will - this is the inevitable course of events. He knows how to renounce participation in these events, his personal will aimed at something else.” (Kutuzov)

10. He behaves like a person who understands that all his words and gestures are a story. “The expression of a gracious and majestic imperial greeting” does not leave his face. (Napoleon).

11. All his actions and phrases are all pretentious and theatrical. His life is a kind of intrigue, he “had to renounce truth and goodness and everything human.” (Napoleon).

12. And “everything that was outside of him did not matter to him, because everything in the world, as it seemed to him, depended only on his will.” (Napoleon).

13. He simply turned out to be weaker than his opponent - “the strongest in spirit,” as Tolstoy put it. (Napoleon).

14. “The source of the extraordinary power of insight into the meaning of occurring phenomena lay in that popular feeling that he carried within himself in all its purity and strength. Only the recognition of this feeling in him made the people, in such strange ways, choose him, an old man in disgrace, against the will of the tsar, as a representative of the people’s war.” (Kutuzov).

15. “By the power entrusted to me by the sovereign and the fatherland, I order to retreat.” (Kutuzov).

Check: group experts give marks (3 min.)

Well done!

1. Determining the topic of the lesson. (3 min.)

Teacher: What, according to L.N. Tolstoy, plays the main role in history?

R. - (Personality, predestination, people, circumstances)

Teacher: You uttered a wonderful word - personality.

What is personality from the point of view of social science? What traits must a person have to be outstanding?

(Personality - a common everyday and scientific term denoting: 1) a human individual as a subject of relationships and conscious activity (a person, in the broad sense of the word) or 2) a stable system of socially significant traits that characterize an individual as a member of a particular society or community.)

Teacher : What can be the assessment of a historical figure?

Student: Negative, positive, ambiguous.

Teacher: What are the main criteria for you in this assessment? Write it down in your notebook.

Students : - Fame, career,

Career promotion for the benefit of the state,

Conscientiousness

Selfless courage.

Ability to exercise independent thought

The ability to take responsibility for your choices, your decisions, your activities.

Teacher:

Are there any outstanding personalities on the pages of the novel?

R. - Yes.

U.- You already guessed who we will talk about in the lesson. Help formulate the topic of the lesson.

Topic: Kutuzov and Napoleon in L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace.”

4. Statement of the lesson problem.(2 min.)

U. I bring to your attention information about the role of the individual in history. The English philosopher Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881) was one of those who returned to the idea of ​​the prominent role of individuals, “heroes” in history. One of his most famous works, which had a very strong influence on his contemporaries and descendants, was called “Heroes and the Heroic in History.” According to Carlyle, world history is the biography of great men. Carlyle focuses in his works on certain individuals and their roles, preaches high goals and feelings, and writes a number of brilliant biographies. He says much less about the masses. In his opinion, the masses are often only instruments in the hands of great personalities.

L.N. Tolstoy had his own point of view on the role of personality in history.

Based on the topic of the lesson and information, will we definitely have to pose a problem?

L.N. Tolstoy took responsibility for the artistic depiction of Kutuzov and Napoleon. What are we going to find out?

R. - Identify Tolstoy’s attitude towards Kutuzov and Napoleon, based on the author’s views on history.

U. – Yes, what is the role of personality in history according to L.N. Tolstoy in the novel “War and Peace”?

R. -Why?

U. -In order to decide for yourself: “I, who am I today, am I walking on that road?”

In the process of working on the pages of the novel, we will have to learn to compare the characters of the characters and see the motives of their actions.

Immerse yourself in feelings and experiences heroes, compare their actions with your own and answer this question: Where am I, who am I in this world?

Mimic gymnastics.(30 sec.)

Maybe you can show how you feel about Kutuzov and Napoleon with facial expressions, facial gymnastics.

Napoleon. Kutuzov.

I saw it, let's see what changes at the end of the lesson!

And also see what is important for L.N. Tolstoy in assessing an outstanding personality and whether your opinion will change at the end of the lesson.

To do this, you need to comprehend the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon from a historical, moral, and universal human point of view.

5. Listening to projects: (10 min.)

1 project: The image of Kutuzov in the novel.

Project 2: The image of Napoleon in the novel.

Project 3: Interview with Kutuzov.

Project 4: interview with Napoleon.

Project 5: Kutuzov and Napoleon in cinema. (S. Bondarchuk “War and Peace”)

Conclusion (1 min.): Kutuzov and Napoleon are the moral poles of the epic novel: the author affirms the greatness of the commander of the people's war and debunks the commander of an army of robbers, marauders and murderers.

Teacher : The people, in Tolstoy’s understanding, are the decisive force in history. Therefore, the main criterion for the necessity or uselessness of a person in the War of 1812 is the attitude towards to the people.

ENTRY IN NOTEBOOKS. (Copy off from the board). (1 min.)

How did Tolstoy feel about the role of the individual in history? (Tolstoy denied the role of personality in history. But it is impossible to talk about complete denial: he, denying the arbitrariness of the individual, the unwillingness to take into account the will of the people, denied the individual who places himself above the people. If the actions of an individual are historically determined, then he plays a certain role in the development of historical events).

6 . PHYSMINUTE. (Gymnastics for the eyes, get up, stretch, sit down). (1 min.)

Teacher: If we have two heroes, what method will we use?

Students: method of comparative analysis.

Teacher: Do you remember when studying which works you have already used it?

Students: Katerina and Varvara, Bazarov and P. P. Kirsanov and others

7 . Independent work in pairs, using text with bookmarks. (10 min.).

We fill out the table individually, but it is checked by experts:

1. Grebtsova Larisa.
2. Tyulukina Svetlana.
3. Belova Daria.
4. Privalova Diana.
5. Nikolaeva Ekaterina.

Group experts check and give a grade for participation in the lesson. Hand over the sheets to the teacher.

Conclusions on projects and assignments.

Tolstoy had his own view on the role of personality in history. The role of personality in history is negligible. Even the most brilliant person cannot direct the movement of history at will. It is created by the masses, the people, and not by an individual who has risen above the people.

U - What conclusion will we draw today on the problem “The role of personality in L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”?
Lesson conclusion: (2 min.) On the board.

We see an explanation of the role of personality in history in the words of the author himself: “There is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.” A personal approach to the role of a historical figure emerged, explained by the worldview views of the writer, convinced thatvictoryover the enemy lies in the spirit of the people; and the driving force of history, according to Tolstoy, is always the people.

Reflection. (3 min. and check 2 min.)

8. COMPILATION OF SINQWAIN.

KUTUZOV NAPOLEON

Tolstoy's War Borodino

Personality People “War and Peace” Army

We read the compiled syncwines aloud.

9. Homework: (1 min.)

Quiz.

1. What is L. A. Ranevskaya’s maiden name?
2. Who is being teased by “22 Misfortunes”?
3. What is Lopakhin's project?
4. Who is called the “shabby gentleman” in the play?
5. What inanimate object is Gaev addressing?
6. Who in the play talks most about the need for work, but does nothing himself?
7. Who works in the play “from morning to evening”?
8. Who said about Lopakhin that he is a “beast of prey”?
9. What does Firs say at the end of the play: “Before the misfortune it was the same: the owl was screaming, and the samovar was humming incessantly”?
10. What were the names of Lyubov Andreevna’s daughters?

Additional material for the lesson.

The problem of personality and people in L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”

In “War and Peace” Tolstoy raised the question of the role of the individual and the people in history. Tolstoy was faced with the task of comprehending artistically and philosophically the war of 1812: “The truth of this war is that it was won by the people.”
Carried away by the thought of the national character of the war, Tolstoy was unable to resolve the question of the role of the individual and the people in history; in Part 3 of Volume 3, Tolstoy enters into an argument with historians who claim that the course of the entire war depends on “great people.” Tolstoy tries to convince that a person’s fate does not depend on their will.
When depicting Napoleon and Kutuzov, the writer almost never shows them in the sphere of government activities. He focuses his attention on those qualities that characterize him as a leader of the masses. Tolstoy believes that it is not a man of genius who directs events, but events that direct him. Tolstoy portrays the council in Fili as advice that makes no sense, because Kutuzov had already decided that Moscow should be abandoned: “The power entrusted to me by the sovereign and the fatherland is an order to retreat.” Of course, this is not true; he has no power. The departure from Moscow is a foregone conclusion. It is not in the power of individuals to decide where history will turn. But Kutuzov managed to understand this historical inevitability. It is not he who says this phrase, it is fate that speaks through his lips. It is so important for Tolstoy to convince the reader of the correctness of his views on the role of the individual and the masses in history that he considers it necessary to comment on each episode of the war from the perspective of these views. The idea does not develop, but is illustrated by new facts in the history of the war. Any historical event was the result of the interaction of thousands of human wills. One person cannot prevent what is about to happen due to the confluence of many circumstances. The offensive became necessary for many reasons, the sum of which led to the Battle of Tarutino. The main reason is the spirit of the army, the spirit of the people, which had a decisive influence on the course of events.
Tolstoy wants to emphasize with a variety of comparisons that great people are confident that the fate of humanity is in their hands, that ordinary people do not talk or think about their mission, but do their job. The individual is powerless to change anything.
The story of Pierre's meeting with Karataev is the story of a meeting with the people, a figurative expression of Tolstoy. Tolstoy suddenly saw that the truth was among the people, and therefore he learned it by becoming close to the peasants. Pierre must come to this conclusion with the help of Karataev. Tolstoy decided this at the last stage of the novel. The role of the people in the War of 1812 is the main theme of the third part. The people are the main force that determines the fate of the war. But the people do not understand and do not recognize the game of war. The war poses a question of life and death. Tolstoy is a historian, thinker, and welcomes partisan warfare. Finishing the novel, he praises the “club of the people’s will,” considering the people’s war an expression of just hatred of the enemy.
In War and Peace, Kutuzov is shown not at headquarters, not at court, but in the harsh conditions of war. He inspects them and speaks kindly to the officers and soldiers. Kutuzov is a great strategist, he uses all means to save the army. He sends a detachment led by Bagration, entangles the French in the networks of their own cunning, accepting the proposal for a truce, and energetically advances the army to join forces with troops from Russia. During the battle, he was not just a contemplator, but fulfilled his duty.
Russian and Austrian troops were defeated. Kutuzov was right - but the realization of this did not soften his grief. To the question: “Are you wounded?” - he replied: “The wound is not here, but here!” - and pointed to the running soldiers. For Kutuzov, this defeat was a serious mental wound. Having taken command of the army when the War of 1812 began, Kutuzov’s first task was to raise the morale of the army. He loves his soldiers. The Battle of Borodino shows Kutuzov as an active, exceptionally strong-willed person. With his bold decisions he influences the course of events. Despite the Russian victory at Borodino, Kutuzov saw that there was no way to defend Moscow. All of Kutuzov's latest tactics were determined by two tasks: the first - the destruction of the enemy; the second is the preservation of Russian troops, for his goal is not personal glory, but the fulfillment of the will of the people, the salvation of Russia.
Kutuzov is shown in various life situations. Kutuzov’s portrait characteristic is unique - a “huge nose,” the only sighted eye in which thought and care shone. Tolstoy repeatedly notes Kutuzov's senile obesity and physical weakness. And this testifies not only to his age, but also to hard military labor and a long combat life. Kutuzov's facial expression conveys the complexity of his inner world. The face bears a stamp of concern before decisive matters. Kutuzov's speech characteristics are unusually rich. He speaks with the soldiers in simple language, with sophisticated phrases - with the Austrian general. Kutuzov's character is revealed through the statements of soldiers and officers. Tolstoy, as it were, sums up this entire multifaceted system of methods for constructing an image with a direct description of Kutuzov as a bearer of the best traits of the Russian people.

Description of the image of Napoleon in the novel.

The image of Napoleon is revealed by Tolstoy from the POSITION of “people's thought.” S.P. Bychkov wrote: “In the war with Russia, Napoleon acted as an invader who sought to enslave the Russian people, he was an indirect killer of many people, this gloomy activity did not give him, according to the writer, the right to greatness.” “Round belly”, “fat thighs of short legs”, “white plump neck”, “fat short figure” with wide, “thick shoulders” - these are the characteristic features of Napoleon’s appearance. When describing Napoleon’s morning toilet on the eve of the Battle of Borodino, Tolstoy strengthens the revealing nature of the initial portrait description of the Emperor of France: “Fat back”, “overgrown fat chest”, “groomed body”, “swollen and yellow” face, “thick shoulders” - all these details are drawn a man far from working life, overweight, deeply alien to the foundations of people's life.

Napoleon was a selfishly narcissistic man who arrogantly believed that the entire universe obeyed his will. People were of no interest to him. The writer, with subtle irony, sometimes turning into sarcasm, exposes Napoleon's claims to world domination, his constant posing for history, his acting. Napoleon played all the time; there was nothing simple and natural in his behavior and words. This is expressive, as shown by Tolstoy in the scene of Napoleon admiring the portrait of his son on the Borodino field.

Of course, it was pure acting. He did not express sincere feelings of “fatherly tenderness” here, but rather he posed for history and acted. This scene clearly reveals the arrogance of Napoleon, who believed that with the occupation of Moscow Russia would be conquered and his plans for conquest of world domination would be realized.

The writer portrays Napoleon as a player and actor in a number of subsequent episodes. On the eve of Borodin, Napoleon says: “The chess is set, the game will begin tomorrow.” On the day of the battle, after the first cannon shots, the writer remarks: “The game has begun.” Tolstoy further proves that this “game” cost the lives of tens of thousands of people. This revealed the bloody nature of Napoleon’s wars, which sought to enslave the world.

Interview with M.I. Kutuzov.

U. – During the Battle of Borodino, you deliberately said a lie that the French were repulsed everywhere, why?

K. – Do you understand what panic is? Soldiers and officers must be confident in the positive outcome of the battle, otherwise - defeat.

U. - M.I., after the Battle of Borodino you mentioned the Turks.

K. – Yes, I said: “There will be them, i.e. The French eat horse meat like the Turks.” And I was right.

W. – Did you hope to defeat Napoleon?

K. - “To break - no, but to deceive - I hoped.”

U. - How?

K. – The longer Napoleon stays in Moscow, the surer our victory.

U. – What role did you assign to the Tarutino maneuver?

K. - Well, now the retreat is over. Not another step back. Tarutino should go down in history not only of Russia, but of all of Europe, and the Nara River will become for Napoleon what it was for Mamaia Nepryadva.

U. – What did you see as the salvation of Russia after the Battle of Borodino?

K. – At the Military Council, I had to make a very difficult, but the only correct decision - retreat. It was necessary to preserve the army, make up for losses and liberate both Moscow and Russia from the enemy.

U. – After the French ran, you said kind words to the soldiers, thanked them for

difficult and faithful service... and felt sorry for the French?

K. – Yes, I said that it’s difficult for them, but it won’t last long. “We’ll send the guests out, then we’ll rest. It’s difficult for you, but you’re still at home; and they - see what they have come to. Worse than the last beggars. While they were strong, we did not feel sorry for them, but now we can feel sorry for them. They are people too."

U. -And the last question: “Why didn’t you go with the army to Europe? You drove Napoleon away, was it necessary to defeat him?”

K. - No, I fulfilled my duty - I drove Napoleon out of Russian land, and then it’s none of my business.

U. Thank you.

"War and Peace" is a Russian national epic. The author himself said about his work: “Without false modesty, this is like the Iliad.” This comparison meant that in L.N. Tolstoy’s novel the national character of a great people was reflected at the moment when its historical fate was being decided. By the beginning of the creation of the epic, the writer had already developed a certain historical and philosophical concept, which was expressed in the work. It consisted of the following: the author believed that only the activity of an individual person can be meaningful and reasonable. In general, the course of history occurs spontaneously, unconsciously, uncontrollably. Its ultimate goals are unknown to people. “Man consciously lives for himself,” Tolstoy argued, “but serves as an unconscious tool for achieving historical, universal goals.” No one, according to the writer, can predetermine the course of historical events, but one can guess the meaning of the events taking place and not interfere with their development. It is such people who rightfully become great.
Such a person in the novel is Kutuzov: “With many years of military experience, he knew and with his senile mind understood that it was impossible for one person to lead hundreds of thousands of people fighting death, and he knew that the fate of the battle was not decided by the orders of the commander-in-chief, nor by the place where the troops stood. , not the number of guns and killed people, but that elusive force called the spirit of the army, and he monitored this force and led it as far as it was in his power.” In the Russian commander L.N. Tolstoy highlights, first of all, those folk, national traits that bring him closer to ordinary people: simplicity and modesty, natural behavior, aversion to any falsehood, pompous speeches and pseudo-patriotism. He is a kind of personification of the spiritual strength and talent of the people, their patriotic spirit. Kutuzov's strategic idea, in Tolstoy's understanding, was the combination of two forces - patience and time, which he often spoke about, and the moral greatness of the army, which he always cared about.
Kutuzov is very prudent, insightful and wise in his decisions. He alone, according to the writer, understood the meaning of the Battle of Borodino; he alone argued that the Battle of Borodino was a victory of the Russians over the French. The commander’s vitality and will were fueled by one thought that never left him: victory over the enemy, which became his only aspiration and most cherished desire. He did not doubt the courage and strength of the Russian soldier, that the enemy would certainly be defeated. And he instilled this confidence in the entire army, which, in turn, felt a living connection with Kutuzov. His “simple, modest and therefore truly majestic figure could not fit into that deceitful form of a European hero, ostensibly controlling people, which was invented,” Tolstoy writes about him. His patriotism, just like the patriotism of ordinary Russian people, is devoid of any panache, external showiness, arrogance and boasting. Tolstoy notes that Kutuzov’s strength lay in the fact that he took into account the objective course of events, understood the popular nature of the war and was closely connected with the people.
Drawing the image of the Russian commander as an exceptional, outstanding personality, the author at the same time reduces to zero the greatness of the image of another commander - Napoleon. These two people are contrasted in the novel. Tolstoy's Napoleon is an arrogant and cruel conqueror, whose actions are not only not justified by history, but also contradict the moral ideal of man. This is a cynical, immoral and narcissistic despot who trampled on everything human, an invader and strangler of the national independence of peoples. He is the embodiment of false wisdom, individualism and self-centeredness; a daring violator of the laws of history. A hero who despises everything and recognizes nothing but his own will. He opposes his “I” to history itself and thereby dooms himself to inevitable collapse. The greatness of Kutuzov’s personality and his close connection lies in his spiritual kinship with the people. Whereas Napoleon cares only about personal glory. This fact completely excludes, in the opinion of the author, the question of Napoleon as an outstanding statesman and military figure of his time.
“People's thought” is expressed in “War and Peace” not only in pictures of the mass patriotic feat of the people, but also in the individual fates of the heroes of the work. Company commander Timokhin, with his simplicity, modesty, humanity, natural behavior, and captain Tushin are seen as the personification of this popular principle, popular strength. Coming from a popular background, they look at things like soldiers, because they themselves are soldiers. Their unnoticed but genuine heroism was a natural manifestation of their moral nature, just like the everyday, ordinary heroism of soldiers and partisans. They are an expression of the very essence of the Russian army, acting as the same embodiment of the national element as Kutuzov. Folk origins also appear in representatives of the nobility - Natasha Rostova, who is ready to sacrifice carts to save the wounded; Andrei Bolkonsky, Pierre Bezukhov, who forgot about their selfish egoistic goals and aspirations, under the influence of the awareness of universal danger and their own duty. All the same national-patriotic feelings and moods are inherent in the old Prince Bolkonsky, and Denisov, and Tikhon Shcherbaty.
In his novel, L. N. Tolstoy vividly expressed the idea that a great person can only be if he is inextricably linked with the people, if he sincerely shares their views, aspirations, and faith. If he lives by the same ideals, thinks and acts in the same way as any conscious person would act. Only in the people is the main strength; only in connection with the people can a real, strong personality manifest itself. Victor Shklovsky wrote about what was not in themenergies of delusion, which at one time made their primary sources classics of literature. The authors streamlined the plot, simplified and made the texts easier to understand. The accents in the film “War and Peace” are placed in the same way as was customary in the Soviet school curriculum. In the era of cinematic experimentation of the 1960s, when such innovative films as"Nine Days of One Year" And "Cranes are Flying"- "War and Peace", even with cinematographic delights, was filmed conservatively and strictly canonically.

Sergei Bondarchuk immediately took a different position. He decided to go into Tolstoy absolutely and completely. He trusted him like an obedient student. For several years he breathed Tolstoy like a shrine, afraid to retreat even in the letter, cherishing the last detail as a whole monologue or character...

- Lev Anninsky

Bondarchuk managed to stay on the fine line between spectacular, humane and intellectual. Even the longest and bloodiest battle scenes do not bore you, but attract your attention. The heroism of soldiers on the battlefield, bodies of horses flying apart from explosions and an unexpected switch to the scene with Napoleon and his adjutants. Bondarchuk conveys to the viewer all the details of the epic drama, without losing the entertainment and at the same time constantly returning to the fundamental theme of Tolstoy - the role of the individual in history.

Original text(English) [show]

- Roger Ebert, June 22, 1969

The main theme of the novel is patriotic. It reveals the moral and ethical victory of the Russian people over the Napoleonic hordes. The main thing in “War and Peace” is human types, bearers of the Russian national character, the “hidden warmth” of their patriotism. All of them, starting from the unknown captain Tushin, from the unnoticed heroes, through whose common forces and lives the greatest shifts in history are accomplished, to the main figures of the story - Andrei Bolkonsky, Pierre, Natasha - all of them are close to the Russian national character. I would like to convey a sharp, tangible, almost material feeling of love for my country with every frame of the epic film.

Sergei Bondarchuk.

Conclusion: S. Bondarchuk completely agrees with L.N. Tolstoy.

Description of the presentation by individual slides:

1 slide

Slide description:

Depiction of historical figures in works of art Images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”

2 slide

Slide description:

Goal: Determine the features of the image of historical figures (Kutuzov and Napoleon) in a work of art. Objectives: Consider the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in the interpretation of L.N. Tolstoy; Find the distinctive features of Tolstoy’s interpretation of images; Draw conclusions

3 slide

Slide description:

4 slide

Slide description:

5 slide

Slide description:

Tolstoy's views on the role of personality in history The historical process is an element. A person in history plays only a leading role. A person can be great only when he submits to the general course of history. The course of history is decided by the masses. All historical events are predetermined from above.

6 slide

Slide description:

Kutuzov Kutuzov, like Suvorov, was one of the remarkable Russian people. Having an extensive education, he had eloquence and the ability to dominate minds. “Even Ribas won’t deceive him,” Suvorov said about his favorite, Kutuzov. Always cheerful, sociable, he was distinguished by amazing composure in the most difficult situations. Strict calculation and restraint were his hallmarks.

7 slide

Slide description:

He knew how to talk to a soldier and, like Suvorov, knowing that ceremonial tinsel and external splendor were not to the heart of the Russian commoner, he, being already the commander-in-chief, appeared before the troops on a small Cossack horse, in an old frock coat without epaulettes, in a cap and with a whip across shoulder.

8 slide

Slide description:

In the novel “War and Peace” he is presented as the inspirer and organizer of the victories of the Russian people. Kutuzov is a truly folk hero. He is guided in his actions by the national spirit. Kutuzov appears in the novel as a simple Russian man, alien to pretense, and at the same time as a wise historical figure and commander.

Slide 9

Slide description:

The main thing in Kutuzov is his blood connection with the people, “that national feeling that he carries within himself in all its purity and strength.” He correctly assessed the significance of the Battle of Borodino, declaring that it was a victory.

10 slide

Slide description:

Tolstoy put him above Napoleon because he understood the course of history and accepted it. This is exactly the kind of commander that was needed to fight the Patriotic War of 1812.

11 slide

Slide description:

Tolstoy emphasizes that after the war moved to Europe, the Russian army needed another commander in chief: “The representative of the people’s war had no choice but death. And he died."

12 slide

Slide description:

Features of the image of Kutuzov Tolstoy deliberately distorts the image of Kutuzov. In Tolstoy's depiction, Kutuzov is a living face. Tolstoy gives this image in the perception of various individuals, delving into psychological analysis. Kutuzov “knew that the fate of the battle was decided not by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place where the troops stood, not by the number of guns and killed people, but by that elusive force called the spirit of war, and he followed this force and led it, as far as it was in his power."

Slide 13

Slide description:

The inconsistency of the image of Kutuzov Kutuzov appears in the novel as a commander, with all his passivity, accurately assessing the course of military events and unerringly directing them. That is, Kutuzov acts as an active figure, hiding enormous volitional tension behind external calm.

Slide 14

Slide description:

Napoleon Napoleon worked extremely hard and read books in various fields of knowledge: travel, geography, history, strategy, tactics, artillery, philosophy. In addition, he achieved enormous success in mathematics.

15 slide

Slide description:

Bonaparte himself determined the order of his first two functions when he declared: “There are only two powerful forces in the world: the saber and the spirit. Ultimately the spirit conquers the saber.”

16 slide

Slide description:

Napoleon appears in the novel as the arrogant ruler of France, blinded by glory, considering himself the driving force of the historical process. He takes on actor's poses and utters pompous phrases. Tolstoy's Napoleon is a “superman” for whom “only what happened in his soul” is of interest. And “everything that was outside of him did not matter to him, because everything in the world, as it seemed to him, depended only on his will.”

Slide 17

Slide description:

Tolstoy believed that Napoleon was like “a child who, holding on to the strings tied inside the carriage, imagines that he is ruling.” In the war with Russia, Napoleon turned out to be weaker than his opponent, the “strongest in spirit.”

18 slide

Slide description:

The writer depicts this famous commander and outstanding figure as a “little man” with an “unpleasantly feigned smile” on his face, with “fat breasts”, “a round belly” and “fat thighs of short legs”.

Slide 19

Slide description:

Features of the portrayal of Napoleon Napoleon in the novel is the antipode of Kutuzov. Tolstoy opposed the cult of Napoleon. Napoleon is an aggressor who attacked Russia, an ambitious man striving for world domination. Napoleon "was already convinced that intelligence, constancy and consistency are not needed for success." There was no meaning in Napoleon’s actions other than whim, but “he believed in himself, and the whole world believed in him.”

20 slide

Slide description:

Conclusions Kutuzov expresses the interests of the people - Napoleon thinks about his own glory. Comparing two great commanders. Tolstoy concludes: “There is and cannot be greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.” Therefore, it is Kutuzov who is truly great - a people’s commander who thinks about the glory and freedom of the Fatherland.

21 slides

Slide description:

Questions and tasks Compare the behavior of Kutuzov and Napoleon before the Battle of Austerlitz Compare the behavior of Kutuzov and Napoleon before the Battle of Borodino Compare the portraits of Kutuzov and Napoleon given in the novel Give a comparative description of the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon.

22 slide

Slide description:

Slide 23

Slide description:

Biographical information about Kutuzov Chronology September 5 (16), 1745 - born in St. Petersburg; 1759 - graduated with honors from the Noble Artillery School; 1764–1765 - took part in hostilities in Poland; 1768–1774 - took part in the Russian-Turkish war; 1774 - near Alushta received a bullet wound to the temple, lost his right eye; 1801 - military governor of St. Petersburg; 1805 - commander-in-chief of the Russian army at Austerlitz; 1806–1807 - was appointed Kyiv military governor; 1808 - corps commander of the Moldavian Army; March 7 (19), 1811 - Commander-in-Chief of the Moldavian Army; August 8 (20), 1812 – commander-in-chief of the Russian army; August 26 (September 7), 1812 - the battle of Borodino, followed by the surrender of Moscow; Winter 1812-1813 - the Russian army under the command of Kutuzov pursued the French and inflicted a decisive defeat on them in the battle on the Berezina River; April 16 (28), 1813 - before the start of the Foreign Campaign, Kutuzov fell ill and died in the German town of Bunzlau (Silesia) on April 16 (28), 1813.

24 slide

Slide description:

The noble family of Golenishchev-Kutuzov traces its origins to a certain Gabriel, who settled in the Novgorod lands during the time of Alexander Nevsky (mid-13th century). Among his descendants in the 15th century was Fyodor, nicknamed Kutuz, whose nephew was called Vasily, nicknamed Boots. His sons began to be called Golenishchev-Kutuzov and were in the royal service. Grandfather M.I. Kutuzov only rose to the rank of captain, his father was already promoted to lieutenant general, and Mikhail Illarionovich earned hereditary princely dignity. Children: Praskovya, Anna, Elizaveta, Ekaterina, Daria. Two of them (Liza and Katya) had their first husbands die fighting under the command of Kutuzov. Since the field marshal did not leave any descendants in the male line, the surname Golenishchev-Kutuzov was transferred to his grandson, Major General P.M., in 1859. Tolstoy, son of Praskovya.

25 slide

Slide description:

Contemporaries about Kutuzov “Only the recognition of this feeling in him made the people, in such strange ways, choose him, an old man in disgrace, against the will of the tsar as representatives of the people’s war.” L. N. Tolstoy “All the best, priceless features of the Russian national character distinguish the nature of this extraordinary personality, right down to the rare ability to treat a defeated enemy humanely, even compassionately, to recognize and respect the enemy’s courage and other military qualities.” Tarle

26 slide

Slide description:

Biographical information about Napoleon Chronology August 15, 1769 - Napoleon Bonaparte was born on the island of Corsica. 1793 - Organization of the successful siege of Toulon, which rebelled against the Revolution. 1796-1797 - Successful conduct of the Italian campaign. 1798-1799 - Conducting the Egyptian campaign and the campaign against Syria. June 14, 1800 - Defeat of Austrian troops at Marengo. December 2, 1805 - Destruction of the Russian-Austrian army at Austerlitz. July 8, 1807 - Conclusion of the Peace of Tilsit with Russia. 1808 - Conquest of Spain. June 1812 - The war with Russia begins. September 7, 1812 - Battle of Borodino. October 16-19, 1813 - Defeat near Leipzig in the “Battle of the Nations.” April 11, 1814 - Napoleon's first abdication. February 1815 - Napoleon's flight from Elba. March 20, 1815 - Entry into Paris, beginning of the “100 days” of rule. June 18, 1815 - Defeat in the battle with the troops of the anti-French coalition at Waterloo. October 15, 1815 - Napoleon arrives at St. Helena. May 5, 1821 - Death of the former Emperor of France Napoleon Bonaparte.

Images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in the epic novel by L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace"

An important feature of the style of artistic prose of L.N. Tolstoy is the technique of contrasting comparisons. The writer contrasts lies with truth, the beautiful with the ugly. The principle of antithesis underlies the composition of the epic novel War and Peace. Tolstoy here contrasts war and peace, false and true life values, Kutuzov and Napoleon, two heroes representing two polar points of the novel.

While working on the novel, the writer was amazed that Napoleon aroused the constant interest and even admiration of some Russian historians, while Kutuzov was viewed by them as an ordinary, unremarkable person. “Meanwhile, it is difficult to imagine a historical person whose activity would be so invariably and constantly directed towards the same goal. It is difficult to imagine a goal more worthy and more consistent with the will of the entire people,” the writer notes. Tolstoy, with his inherent great insight as an artist, correctly guessed and perfectly captured some of the character traits of the great commander: his deep patriotic feelings, love for the Russian people and hatred of the enemy, sensitive attitude towards the soldier. Contrary to the opinion of official historiography, the writer shows Kutuzov at the head of a just people's war.

Kutuzov is depicted by Tolstoy as an experienced commander, a wise, straightforward and courageous person who sincerely cares for the fate of the Fatherland. At the same time, his appearance is ordinary, in a certain sense “down to earth.” The writer emphasizes the characteristic details in the portrait: “fat neck”, “plump old hands”, “stooped back”, “bleak white eye”. However, this hero is very attractive to readers. His appearance is contrasted with the spiritual strength and intelligence of the commander. “The source of this extraordinary power of insight in the sense of occurring phenomena lay in that popular feeling that he carried within himself in all its purity and strength. Only the recognition of this feeling in him made the people, in such strange ways, choose him, an old man in disgrace, against the will of the tsar as representatives of the people’s war,” notes L.N. Tolstoy.

In the novel, Kutuzov first appears before us as the commander of one of the armies in the military campaign of 1805-1807. And here the writer outlines the character of the hero. Kutuzov loves Russia, cares about the soldiers, and is easy to deal with them. He strives to protect the army and opposes senseless military operations.

He is a sincere, straightforward, courageous person. Before the Battle of Austerlitz, having heard from the sovereign a demand for immediate action, Kutuzov was not afraid to hint at the tsar’s love for ostentatious shows and parades. “After all, we are not in Tsaritsyn Meadow,” noted Mikhail Illarionovich. He understood the doom of the battle at Austerlitz. And the scene at the military council when reading Weyrother’s disposition (Kutuzov was dozing at this military council) also has its own explanation. Kutuzov did not agree with this plan, but understood that the plan had already been approved by the sovereign and a battle could not be avoided.

During the difficult time of the Napoleonic army’s attack on Russia, the people elect a commander “against the will of the tsar as representatives of the people’s war.” And the writer explains what is happening this way: “While Russia was healthy, a stranger could serve her, and there was an excellent minister; but as soon as she is in danger, she needs her own, dear person.” And Kutuzov becomes such a person. This war reveals the best qualities of an outstanding commander: patriotism, wisdom, patience, insight and foresight, closeness to the people.

On the Borodino field, the hero is depicted in the concentration of all moral and physical forces, as a person who cares, first of all, about preserving the morale of the army. Having learned about the capture of the French marshal, Kutuzov conveys this news to the troops. And vice versa, he tries to prevent unfavorable news from leaking into the mass of soldiers. The hero carefully monitors everything that happens, being in firm confidence in victory over the enemy. “He knew from long military experience and understood with his senile mind that it is impossible for one person to lead hundreds of thousands of people fighting death, and he knew that the fate of the battle is not decided by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place where the troops stand, not by the number of guns and killed people , and that elusive force called the spirit of the army, and he watched over this force and led it, as far as it was in his power,” writes Tolstoy. Kutuzov attaches great importance to the Battle of Borodino, since it is this battle that becomes the moral victory of the Russian troops. Assessing the commander, Andrei Bolkonsky thinks about him: “He will have nothing of his own. He won’t come up with anything, won’t do anything, but he will listen to everything, remember everything and won’t allow anything harmful. He understands that there is something stronger and more significant than his will - this is the inevitable course of events, and he knows how to see them, knows how to understand their meaning, and in view of this meaning knows how to renounce participation in these events, from his personal will aimed at different."

Tolstoy's depiction of Napoleon and Kutuzov is contrasting. Napoleon always counts on the audience, he is effective in his speeches and actions, strives to appear before others in the image of a great conqueror. Kutuzov, on the contrary, is far from our traditional ideas about a great commander. He is easy to communicate with and his behavior is natural. And the writer emphasizes this idea by depicting him at the military council in Fili, before the surrender of Moscow. Russian generals, together with the commander-in-chief, gather in a simple peasant hut, and the peasant girl Malasha sees them. Kutuzov here decides to leave Moscow without a battle. He surrenders Moscow to Napoleon in order to save Russia. When he then finds out that Napoleon has left Moscow, he cannot contain his feelings and cries with joy, realizing that Russia has been saved.

It is worth noting that the novel reveals the views of L.N. Tolstoy on history, on the art of war. The writer claims that “the course of world events is predetermined from above, depends on the coincidence of all the arbitrariness of the people participating in these events, and that the influence of Napoleon on the course of these events is only external and fictitious.” Thus, Tolstoy denies the role of the commander’s personality in this war, his military genius. Kutuzov in the novel also underestimates the role of military science, attaching importance only to the “spirit of the army.”

The commander Kutuzov is opposed in the novel by Napoleon Bonaparte. From the very beginning, the writer debunks Napoleon, highlighting everything small and insignificant in his appearance: he is a “little man”, “with small hands” and an “unpleasantly cloying smile” on his “swollen and yellow face.” The author persistently emphasizes Napoleon’s “physicality”: “fat shoulders”, “thick back”, “overgrown fat chest”. This “physicality” is especially emphasized in the morning toilet scene. By undressing his hero, the writer, as it were, removes Napoleon from his pedestal, brings him down to earth, and emphasizes his lack of spirituality.

Tolstoy's Napoleon is a gambler, a narcissistic, despotic man, thirsty for fame and power. “If Kutuzov is characterized by simplicity and modesty, then Napoleon is like an actor playing the role of the ruler of the world. His theatrically false behavior in Tilsit during the awarding of the Russian soldier Lazarev with the French Order of the Legion of Honor. Napoleon behaves no less unnaturally before the Battle of Borodino, when... the courtiers present him with a portrait of his son and he pretends to be a loving father.”

On the eve of the Battle of Borodino, the emperor says: “Chess is set, the game will begin tomorrow.” However, the “game” here turns into defeat, blood, and human suffering. On the day of the Battle of Borodino, “the terrible sight of the battlefield defeated the spiritual strength in which he believed his merit and greatness.” “Yellow, swollen, heavy, with dull eyes, a red nose and a hoarse voice, he sat on a folding chair, involuntarily listening to the sounds of gunfire and not raising his eyes... He endured the suffering and death that he saw on the battlefield. The heaviness of his head and chest reminded him of the possibility of suffering and death for him. At that moment he did not want Moscow, victory, or glory for himself.” “And never, however,” writes Tolstoy, “until the end of his life he could understand neither goodness, nor beauty, nor truth, nor the meaning of his actions, which were too opposite to goodness and truth, too far from everything human...”

Tolstoy finally debunks Napoleon in the scene on Poklonnaya Hill, before entering Moscow. “Waiting for a deputation from Moscow, Napoleon is thinking about how he should appear before the Russians at such a majestic moment for him. As an experienced actor, he mentally played out the entire scene of the meeting with the “boyars” and composed a speech to them with his generosity. Using the artistic device of the hero’s “internal” monologue, Tolstoy reveals in the French emperor the petty vanity of the player, his insignificance, his posturing.” “Here it is, this capital; she lies at my feet, awaiting her fate... And this is a strange and majestic minute!” “...One word of mine, one movement of my hand, and this ancient capital perished... Here it lies at my feet, playing and trembling with golden domes and crosses in the rays of the sun.” The second part of this monologue contrasts sharply with the first. “When it was announced to Napoleon with due caution that Moscow was empty, he looked angrily at the person who reported this and, turning away, continued to walk in silence... “Moscow is empty. What an incredible event!” - he spoke to himself. He did not go to the city, but stopped at an inn in the Dorogomilovsky suburb.” And here Tolstoy notes that the denouement of the theatrical performance was unsuccessful - “the power that decides the fate of peoples does not lie in the conquerors.” Thus, Tolstoy denounces Bonapartism as a great social evil, “contrary to human reason and all human nature.”

It is characteristic that the writer strove for an objective assessment of Napoleon's military talent. Thus, before the Battle of Austerlitz, Bonaparte was able to correctly assess the military situation: “his assumptions turned out to be correct.” But still, according to Tolstoy, “in historical events, great people are only labels that give a name to the event...” “Napoleon,” the writer notes, “during all this time of his activity, he was like a child who, holding on to the ribbons tied inside the carriage , imagines that he rules."

Thus, the main driving force of history, according to Tolstoy, is the people. And the writer’s truly great personalities are simple, natural, and bearers of “national feeling.” Kutuzov appears as such a person in the novel. And “there is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth,” therefore Napoleon appears in Tolstoy as the embodiment of extreme individualism, aggression, and lack of spirituality.

Searched here:

• images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in the novel War and Peace
• the image of Napoleon and Kutuzov in the novel War and Peace
• image of Kutuzov and Napoleon

The role of the images of Napoleon and Kutuzov in L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”

One of the main questions in Tolstoy's novel is the philosophical question of what a great man is. The author answers it in the fourth volume of War and Peace in this way: “There is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.”

To understand the author’s interpretation of the “great man,” the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon presented in the novel are extremely important, since they help to understand the author’s position as accurately as possible and see the author’s answer to this philosophical question.

In the image of Napoleon, the writer constantly emphasizes insincerity and pretense, which are manifested in the fact that Napoleon pays a lot of attention to his image and concern for how he will look in the eyes of others. Tolstoy emphasizes the lack of simplicity in the French commander, describing the behavior of the emperor on the eve of the Battle of Borodino, when he examined the portrait of his son presented to him. Napoleon talks about what facial expression makes sense for him to have when looking at the portrait of his child, that is, what kind of mask he should wear: “He felt that what he would say and do now was history. And it seemed to him that it would be best [.] for him to show, in contrast to this greatness, the simplest fatherly tenderness.”

Napoleon’s remarkable acting instinct saves him in many situations when, in his own words, “du sublime au ridicule il n’y a qu’un pas” (“from the great to the ridiculous is one step”). Speaking about this, Tolstoy makes the ironic remark “(he sees something sublime in himself),” that is, “he sees something great in himself,” thereby casting doubt on this statement. Also, discussing greatness, Tolstoy analyzes the meaning of the word “Grand” (“great”), which is attributed to many historical figures by historians: ““C’est grand!” (“This is majestic!”) - say historians, and then there is no longer either good or bad, but there is “grand” and “not grand”. Grand is good, not grand is bad. Grand is a property, according to their concepts, of some special animals, which they call heroes. And Napoleon, walking home in a warm fur coat from the dying not only of his comrades, but (in his opinion) of the people he brought here, feels que c’est grand, and his soul is at peace.”

Tolstoy certainly agrees with Napoleon’s aphorism about the great and the funny, and this is evident in the scene where the emperor stands on Poklonnaya Hill and waits for the boyars with the keys to Moscow: “His speech to the boyars was already clearly formed in his imagination. This speech was full of dignity and the greatness that Napoleon understood.” But then it turned out that “Moscow is empty, that everyone has left and left it,” and the main question in Napoleonic circles became “how to announce this to the emperor, how, without putting His Majesty in that terrible situation, called by the French ridicule (“ridicule”) "- Ed.) position, to announce to him that he waited in vain for the boyars for so long, that there are crowds of drunks, but no one else.”

In the image of Kutuzov, Tolstoy, on the contrary, emphasizes naturalness, kindness, generosity and sincerity; the author strongly emphasizes that the commander-in-chief does not care about his image and tries to communicate with the soldiers on equal terms. For example, in the fourth volume, after another successful battle, when Kutuzov addresses the soldiers with a speech, Tolstoy writes: “suddenly his voice and expression changed: the commander-in-chief stopped speaking, and a simple, old man spoke.”

Tolstoy does not see kindness in Napoleon. This is emphasized by the fact that the emperor has certain habits that, according to the author, are unnatural, and is even proud of them. For example, Napoleon "considered the dead and wounded remaining on the battlefield." Tolstoy writes how Bolkonsky, lying wounded on the battlefield, sees Napoleon doing this and notes that Prince Andrei “knew that it was Napoleon - his hero, but at that moment Napoleon seemed to him such a small, insignificant person in comparison with that “What was happening now between his soul and this high, endless sky with clouds running across it.” In this scene, Napoleon loses his significance for Bolkonsky and appears as just a grain of sand under this huge sky of Austerlitz. This is the truth of life, which was revealed to Prince Andrei on the verge of life and death.

Tolstoy portrays Kutuzov as a wise and insightful person. At the council in Fili, where all the generals were excited, proposing ways to save Moscow, only Kutuzov retained his composure. Tolstoy writes that some of the participants in the discussion “seemed not to understand that the present council could not change the inevitable course of affairs and that Moscow had already been abandoned,” while others “understood this and, leaving aside the question of Moscow, talked about the direction which was supposed to receive the army in its retreat.” In the end, Kutuzov answered Bennigsen’s question posed in such a pompous manner (“Should we leave the sacred and ancient capital of Russia without a fight or defend it?”), while showing coldness and prudence. Tolstoy shows how difficult this decision was for the commander-in-chief: “But I (he stopped) by the power entrusted to me by my sovereign and fatherland, I order a retreat.”

The peasant girl Malasha, who by chance became a witness to this historical event, sympathizes not with the “long-haired” Bennigsen, but with the “grandfather” Kutuzov - this is how Tolstoy wanted to show that even a child, on some intuitive level, feels the simplicity, kindness and sincerity of Kutuzov, who retained his sobriety in the face of provocation.

In the novel, Tolstoy gives another detail that characterizes Kutuzov as a generous person. The commander-in-chief comes to the regiment to inspect the banners and prisoners, but when he looks at them he feels sorry for them, and he says: “while they were strong, we did not feel sorry for ourselves, but now we can feel sorry for them. They are people too." After this, Kutuzov “read sympathy for his words” on the faces of the soldiers. Tolstoy writes that “the heartfelt meaning of this speech was not only understood, but that same, that very feeling of majestic triumph, combined with pity for the enemies and the consciousness of one’s rightness, expressed by this, precisely this old man’s, good-natured curse - this very feeling lay in the soul of every soldier and was expressed in a joyful, long-lasting cry.” This means that Kutuzov very subtly felt the mood of his soldiers and expressed what they had long understood.

Showing Napoleon’s attitude towards prisoners of war and towards military operations in general, Tolstoy gives him an accurate description, which is contained in the phrase of the commander himself before the battle: “The chess is set, the game will begin tomorrow,” that is, Napoleon compares the battle with a chess game, and people, accordingly, with pieces on the board that the player can dispose of according to his wishes.

Kutuzov, according to Bolkonsky, “understands that there is something stronger and more significant than his will - this is the inevitable course of events, and he knows how to see them, knows how to understand their meaning and, in view of this meaning, knows how to renounce participation in these events , from his personal will aimed at something else,” that is, he understands what is happening around him in a completely different way.

Kutuzov realized the full meaning of the words “Patriotic War” and thus gained the favor of ordinary soldiers. Tolstoy asks the question of how Kutuzov “guessed so correctly then the meaning of the popular meaning of the event that he never once betrayed it in all his activities?” which he carried within himself in all its purity and strength.”

In the novel, Kutuzov puts the humanistic idea of ​​the common good first, while abandoning personal glory. And this is the main difference between him and Napoleon, who quite often thinks about his greatness on the pages of the novel.

The images of these two historical figures on the pages of the novel allow Tolstoy to express his own vision of what it makes sense to be like a person who can be called truly great.